Our Jewish Ebola Control Team, with a straight face, orders that all US-bound persons from West African epidemic states must land at one of our five biggest and most crowded hub airports. There, they will have their temperatures taken and be checked for rash.

This is absurd. The more people around a carrier, the more likely is a transfer of the virus. Someone may cut themselves shaving in an airport and may smear a small amount of blood on the restroom sink – where, minutes later, someone brushes their hand and later touches his finger to his mouth, where an Ebola virion enters his system. And the carrier who leaves Ebola virus on the sink may be one or two weeks from manifesting fever or rash symptoms themselves.

They just made transmission of Ebola something that is going to be a lot more frequent in the coming weeks and months – and they spin it as “tighter restrictions” AND NO ONE CONTRADICTS THAT ABSURD CLAIM!!!!!!!

Rep. Tim Murphy: Dr. Frieden, when we spoke on the phone the other day, you remained opposed to travel restrictions because, in your words, you said cutting commercial ties would hurt these fledgling democracies. Where did this opinion come from that that’s of high importance?

CDC Director Frieden: My sole concern is to protect Americans as well as…

Rep. Tim Murphy: Did someone advise you on that? Someone else, outside of yourself? Somebody else advise you that that’s a position, that we need to protect fledgling democracies?

CDC Director Frieden: My recollection of that conversation is that that discussion was in the context of our ability to stop the epidemic at the source.

The CDC is misinforming us about when the blood of an Ebola victim becomes contagious. A person’s blood can infect others for up to three weeks before the indicative symptoms (fever, rash, vomiting, etc.) appear in that person. The CDC says that no one can catch Ebola from an infected person until that person exhibits the indications. The lie is systematic and involves coordination (conspiracy) among many agencies and doctors. They are deceiving us for a reason. They are fostering an epidemic to further a hidden agenda. We cannot let them do that.

The CDC and Doctors Without Borders are wrong when they tell us that the virus a person carries is not transmissible until that person exhibits the first symptoms. The fact is that, for two weeks up to 42 days (the range has doubled with new WHO findings), the virus is carried in the blood before symptoms appear. During that time, the blood of that carrier can infect others: blood from menstruation, blood in the feces, blood from a cut, or scratched insect bite, or any broken skin, can be transferred to the body of another – where it may enter the mouth, the eye, the mucous membrane in the nose, or any opening in the skin, to infect a new victim with the full-blown virus.

An automatic three-week quarantine makes sense for anyone “with a clear exposure” to Ebola, said Dr. Richard Wenzel, a Virginia Commonwealth University scientist who formerly led the International Society for Infectious Diseases.

However,

Doctors Without Borders, the group [Dr. Craig] Spencer was working for, said in a statement that that would be going too far. People with Ebola aren’t contagious until symptoms begin, and even then it requires close contact with body fluids.

“As long as a returned staff member does not experience any symptoms, normal life can proceed,” the organization said in a statement.

The World Health Organization is not recommending the quarantine of returning aid workers without symptoms, according to spokeswoman Sona Bari.

“Health care workers are generally self-monitoring and are aware of the need to report any symptoms, as this patient did,” she wrote in an email.

Since the outbreak began, we’ve been told by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that Ebola is only spread through direct contact with blood or bodily fluids while a person is symptomatic. No one has told us how or by whom this determination was made.

The CDC is systematically concealing the fact that Ebola in the bloodstream is contagious as long as two and a half weeks before the first symptom.

Yet if you google “When does Ebola become contagious?” you will get discussion about everything – is it airborne, etc. – but nothing that gives an answer to that question. Where does that claim come from?

There is a reason for that omission. The reason is that any blood droplet can transmit the disease to others, if it reaches someone’s mouth or eye or other opening that gets the virion past the skin. And that fact is being denied by the CDC, which is telling you that the disease is not contagious until someone runs a fever. That lie is opening the doors to the epidemic.

People need to understand this, unite together with a common voice, and show the government that you mean it: by voting out all incumbents on November 4.

On November 4, vote out all the incumbents

Pick any Ebola expert you know. Contact him, and ask him how long before the first definite symptom (fever, rash, vomiting) can the blood of the carrier be contagious.

The answer is that the virus enters the bloodsteam quickly – and from that moment, it is possible for a droplet of blood escaping the body to infect another person. An infected person can, via blood-borne transmission, be the source of infection for another.

That makes the present containment strategy hopeless – and those behind the strategy must know it, making them conspirators in establishing a deadly epidemic, where it could easily be prevented by the appropriate quarantine measures.

I am asking you to spread this fact everywhere you can. Challenge anyone representing themselves as an expert to tell you why they think that bleeding during the pre-symptom period cannot infect others. Ask them why they think that the virus cannot be spread until the carrier gets a fever. Ask them how they think that the virions in the blood cannot transmit to others before the fever, but that they can the day after the fever.

And tell me, why are you afraid to speak out about this, demanding immediate adoption of the necessary quarantine strategy?

Do you fear that they may try to hurt you, if you call them out on what they are doing? My dear friend, they are already in the process of murdering you – and the point where the people can stand up and make the public will felt, is fading fast….

Leaders of African states experiencing the epidemic want the US to accept travellers from their countries – not because they think it is safe or that it can be safe, but because they think that if the US suffers the epidemic, the US will put more resources into finding a cure. They also believe that the US having an Ebola epidemic will make Africa and America more equal in this war of unequally distributed woe.

Dr. Betsy Foxman, of the University of Michigan School of Public Health, says there is little fear of Ebola contagion.

I say she is wrong. Watch her video here. And view more Jewish doctors from U. of M. School of Public Health misleading you – here.

An Ebola epidemic will become a pandemic. They are lying about the virus not being transmissible before the fever stage. Blood does carry complete virions (virus units) – any one of which, if it enters another person’s system, will make another contagion carrier. The measures taken – checking for fever and then tracing contacts of those who prove infected – cannot work. That strategy is defeated by a virus that can infect more people through blood contact, even two weeks before the symptom shows on the carrier.

They are engaging in disinformation to cover this fact.

I am sure of this. I am asking you join me in letting people know.

This is very basic. Why does an intelligent person like yourself ignore so immediate and certain a threat?

I am asking for a written statement alerting others to the fact that the CDC is lying when it says that Ebola cannot be contracted from carriers before the fever presents itself. It certainly can – and for two weeks or more.

Remember, WWI got more attention, but the 1918-19 flu epidemic killed more people.

How can you help?

Vote out all incumbents, as the people’s exercise of power in taking control of ending this epidemic.

Get the CDC and Ebola team fired for criminal negligence and their conspiracy to abuse their positions to promote an epidemic, instead of preventing one.

Begin total quarantine, in which contact is minimized and extra precautions are taken by everyone for 25 days, after which time those regions certified Ebola-free may begin communication with other regions. Encourage other nations to undertake the same strategy.

Nationalize pharmaceutical companies: draft them as “legal persons” and give them soldiers’ pay, making sure there is no profit for them from this epidemic – because the profit motive, through disaster capitalism “moral hazard,” is behind both the creation and appearance of this strain of virus and the fact that the proper steps to stop its spread are deliberately not being taken.

The epidemic is being brought to the US through policies that are in fact the opposite of quarantine. The American people must deal with an enemy that has control of our government and is waging biological warfare against us, while pretending to be trying to contain an epidemic.

The virus is in the blood and is transmissible one or more weeks before the onset of the fever symptom. The denial of this by the CDC is completely without foundation.

It is a lie that contact with blood of an infected person cannot lead to infection if it happens before the fever first manifests. THE CDC IS LETTING THAT VERY DANGEROUS MISINFORMATION STAND – proof enough that the CDC leadership is owned by the pharmaceutical companies that want an epidemic and a sellers’ market in vaccines.

It is disaster capitalism combined with war profiteering. Big Pharma is also Big Bioweapons – and pandemics are as profitable as big wars.

Ron Klain, who began his job Wednesday as coordinator of the Ebola response, was asked in an interview what he thought to be the “top leadership issue challenging our world today.”

“I think the top leadership issue in the world today is how to deal with the continuing growing population in the world and all the resources demand it places on in the world and burgeoning populations in Asia and Africa that lack the resources to have a healthy, happy life,” Klain replied. “And I think we’ve got to find a way to make the world work for everyone.”

He said climate change impacts the overpopulation issue “by making it hard for people to live where they live.”

According to an August 2014 poll, half of Israelis want to send Obama Ebola for only supporting Israeli terrorism 95%, not 100%.

In the wake of Israel’s summer 2014 genocidal massacre in Gaza, euphemistically called “Operation Protective Edge,” the US corporate media is finally (somewhat) catching on to the egregious degree of violent extremism, racism, and downright fascism in Israeli culture.

Note, these aren’t just “some” Israelis, as NBC writes; these are almost half of Israelis.

Vox also ran a story, published on 4 August, when 48% of polled Israelis had advocated sending Ebola. (10% more wanted to send Obama a song based on Prime Minister Netanyahu telling Obama to “never second-guess me again.” Never second-guess the supreme leader of your totalitarian apartheid ethnostate. Does anyone else smell fascism?)

This is the absurd degree of vehement jingoism in Israeli popular culture today. Almost half of Israelis want to send Obama — the president of the country that gives them $3.1 billion in unconditional aid per year, bankrolling their colonization, dispossession, and genocide of the Palestinian people — a deadly disease as a birthday surprise.

NBC reports that over 2,000 Israelis voted in the online survey. “Other less popular choices,” it explains, “included ‘peace in the middle east’ and ‘golf clubs.’” Peace has always been a low priority in Israel. Settler colonialism, occupation, and ethnic cleansing tend to be much, much, much higher on the list.

It should be mentioned that this survey is not scholarly and statistically rigorous, and cannot be meant to be an exact representation of the Israeli population as a whole. Regardless of the precise figure, nonetheless, Mako (the site on which the poll was conducted) is very popular, and it is telling indeed that 46-48% of those who frequent this popular website want to murder the president of the country that gives them billions upon billions in aid.

Israel’s ability to frame its assault against territory it occupies as a right of self-defense turns international law on its head.

A state cannot simultaneously exercise control over territory it occupies and militarily attack that territory on the claim that it is “foreign” and poses an exogenous national security threat. In doing precisely that, Israel is asserting rights that may be consistent with colonial domination but simply do not exist under international law.

The precarious and unstable conditions in the Gaza Strip from which Palestinians suffer are Israel’s responsibility. Israel argues that it can invoke the right to self-defense under international law as defined in Article 51 of the UN Charter. The International Court of Justice, however, rejected this faulty legal interpretation in its 2004 Advisory Opinion. The ICJ explained that an armed attack that would trigger Article 51 must be attributable to a sovereign state, but the armed attacks by Palestinians emerge from within Israel’s jurisdictional control. Israel does have the right to defend itself against rocket attacks, but it must do so in accordance with occupation law and not other laws of war. Occupation law ensures greater protection for the civilian population. The other laws of war balance military advantage and civilian suffering. The statement that “no country would tolerate rocket fire from a neighboring country” is therefore both a diversion and baseless.

Israel denies Palestinians the right to govern and protect themselves, while simultaneously invoking the right to self-defense. This is a conundrum and a violation of international law, one that Israel deliberately created to evade accountability.

Obama was one of the largest purveyors of this grotesque, farcical lie. After several weeks of reiterating ad nauseam the myth that Israel has the legal (let alone moral) “right” to “defend” itself — as Israel brutally bombed Palestinian civilians into oblivion and dead Gazan babies were kept in ice cream freezers because medical supplies had run out and morgues were overflowing — the Obama administration finally took the international community’s hint and reached for a better-looking PR move. It was only in the final throes of Israel’s genocide in Gaza that Obama tepidly said, “Hey guys, maybe you should bring it back a little bit. This doesn’t look good.”

Obama’s support wasn’t just rhetorical, however. NBC hints at the irony of this Ebola birthday gift poll, noting that, on his own birthday, Obama gave a generous and hefty gift to Israel: $225 million of additional US citizens’ tax dollars to be used on its Iron Dome missile defense system.

“The White House has been keen to downplay suggestions of a growing rift,” NBC observes. After all, Obama has made it a common practice to emphasize the US’s “unshakable commitment to Israel and Israel’s security,” its “strongest ally and greatest friend.”

The US did, after a month of destruction, finally muster up the courage to call Israeli strikes on Gaza schools “horrifying” and “disgraceful” (they forgot to add “in complete and flagrant violation of international law” — but the US has never really cared about international law in the first place, so perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised), yet muffled its already infrequent and quiet moments of hesitation when Netanyahu warned Obama “not to ever second-guess me again.”

In spite of the US president’s almost indefatigable (“almost” being the operative word, in this case) support, most Israelis are livid that Obama is only 95%, not 100%, behind their project of systemic settler colonialism and ethnic cleansing. As the Vox story points out, a 2013 poll found that “only 10% of Israelis view Obama favorably,” and a 2014 poll concluded that 70% of Jewish Israelis do not trust Obama. Many cite the president’s subdued criticism of the expansion of illegal Israeli settlements as the reason behind this growing antipathy, but Obama’s rhetoric is empty at best.

An important distinction should be made here. These studies should not be taken as a demonization of all Israelis. As in the US, there are indeed in Israel anti-racist, anti-fascist, anti-Zionist leftists, who seek peace with the indigenous Palestinians (and with African immigrants), and wish to end their fascist, settler colonialist ethnoreligious supremacist state’s policies of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and occupation. These leftists, in fact, are enormously brave — surely braver than most of us in the US. Here in ’murica, we may be denigrated, ridiculed, yelled at on the street; we may be fired from our jobs. In Israel, on the other hand, fascist mobs roam the streets chanting “Death to leftists!” and “Gas the leftists!” (along with “Death to Arabs!” and “Gas the Arabs!”, of course). If you are an anti-racist, anti-Zionist Israeli — or an anti-Zionist Orthodox Jew — you go to demonstrations well aware of the fact that fascist mobs will attack you, with complete impunity, police watching and cheering — or, in some cases, even beating you themselves. I could hardly respect Israeli leftists more.

Yet the vast majority of Israelis support their ethnocracy’s crimes. The vast majority. In regards to Israel’s most recent slaughter in Gaza, that number is 95%, to be exact. This is about as close to a national consensus as you ever get.

In 2012, in Haaretz, renowned journalist Gideon Levy published the results of a poll that found “Most Israeli Jews Would Support Apartheid Regime in Israel.” This study, “expos[ing] anti-Arab, ultra-nationalist views espoused by a majority of Israeli Jews,” was not based on an internet survey. It was conducted by Dialog and directed by professor Camil Fuchs, Haaretz’s polling expert and head of the Department of Statistics at Tel Aviv University’s School of Mathematical Science, and commissioned by the Yisraela Goldblum Fund.

The study revealed the following unsavory facts about Israeli society:

– 59% want preference for Jews over Arabs in admission to jobs in government ministries.

– 49% want the state to treat Jewish citizens better than Arab ones

– 42% don’t want to live in the same building with Arabs

– 42% don’t want their children in the same class with Arab children

– c. 33% want a law barring Israeli Arabs from voting for the Knesset

– 69% object to giving 2.5 million Palestinians the right to vote if Israel annexes the West Bank

– 74% majority are in favor of separate roads for Israelis and Palestinians

– 24% believe separate roads are “a good situation”

– 50% believe separate roads are “a necessary situation”

– 47% want part of Israel’s Arab population to be transferred to the Palestinian Authority

– 36% support transferring some of the Arab towns from Israel to the PA, in exchange for keeping some of the West Bank settlements

– 38% want Israel to annex the territories with settlements on them

– 31% don’t admit that Israel practices apartheid against Arabs

– 58% do admit that Israel practices apartheid against Arabs

At the forefront of our critiques of Israel should be condemnation of the ethnoreligious supremacist state itself, as it is this structural, systemic oppression that in turn influences and creates individual oppressors. In other words, the problem with Israeli, or any other, society, as with the problem endemic in any form of oppression, is not with mere individual politicians, with mere individual parties, or with mere individual institutions; the problem is with the structure, the system itself. In the case of Israel, that system is a Zionist, white supremacist, settler colonialist one.

Yet, as polls like these demonstrate, the ills of this system manifest themselves individually. The structural nature of oppression by no means absolves Israelis of the responsibility for the crimes against humanity that their “democratic” government commits — after all, Israel is purportedly “the only democracy in the middle east,” as Zionists so often boast — just as we, as Americans, are absolutely complicit in our own government’s acts of racist, imperialist terrorism, whether that manifest itself in the form of perpetual war, drone strikes, torture, or mass incarceration. We can all be considered “little Eichmanns,” as some have called us, in allusion to Hannah Arrendt’s opus Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil.

The silver lining (and I am not one for silver linings — I find them to be quite bourgeois) in these clouds of death, destruction, and despair is that, as Israel lurches further and further to the right, plunging headfirst into what can only be accurately referred to as fascism, the Western media is gradually waking up. NBC can no longer ignore it when half of Israelis express a desire to kill the US president.

The struggle for just, accurate coverage in the US corporate media — and for the hearts and minds of the American people — is slowly, but surely, being won. If it were to be awarded a grade, it would still get an F, as Glenn Greewald insists, yet it is beginning to cover stories that it wouldn’t have touched with a 10-foot pole only a few years ago. The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement is growing, especially among Jewish Americans and student activists. A vicious, McCarthyist campaign of repression of Palestinian solidarity activism is being waged, one that destroys people’s entire careers, yet today’s young Americans constitute the first generation to have seen past the ceaseless barrage of propaganda. Support for Palestinian human rights and liberation is increasing. There is still so much to be done, and a long road ahead of us, yet we have good reason to be optimistic — cautiously optimistic, yet optimistic nonetheless.

PHOTO: A masked man speaking in what is believed to be a North American accent in a video that Islamic State militants released in September 2014 is pictured in this still frame from video obtained by Reuters October 7, 2014.

At first sight, it seems that Israel is just as preoccupied with the rise of Islamic State as anyone else. Israeli media report diligently on the extremist group’s assault on the Kurdish town of Kobani and run at least a story every few days on its atrocities. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu references Islamic State frequently, as do other Israeli ministers. And the stories of two Palestinian citizens of Israel who died fighting for the group have been recently featured in the press.

Still, Israel remains the least concerned and least directly threatened country in a region increasingly rocked by Islamic State’s advance. It certainly does not see the group as an external threat. Shocking though the events in Syria and Iraq are, Israel is far beyond the range of even the most sophisticated of Islamic State’s weapons. The group’s immediate territorial interests do not extend to anywhere near Israeli borders, and its support in areas adjacent to Israel is still negligible. What’s more, unlike many militant groups and states in the region, Islamic State has declared itself emphatically disinterested in intervening in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, preferring instead to draw its support from Sunni revanchism and introducing a semblance of order into war-torn regions of Iraq.

Islamic State also does not yet pose an internal threat to Israel. Unlike most countries bordering Syria, Israel has not been politically or demographically unsettled by the civil war there. The diversified systems of control employed by Israel – some liberal democracy and some military rule — have cemented differences among the country’s constituencies disgruntled with the Israeli government. The divisions have precluded the emergence of a broad uprising similar to those that constituted the Arab Spring. The relatively short, highly militarized border between Israel and Syria has prevented the influx of refugees into Israel, as well as any significant spread of the fighting.

In the absence of incentives to change policy, Israel remains determined to display an official disinterest in Iraq and a staunch neutrality toward Syria. Although the government has often expressed sympathy for victims of the Syrian civil war and offered some of them medical treatment, and has on one or two occasions hit targets in Syria, Israel has been careful to signal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that it considers him a relatively reliable neighbor and would not work actively to replace him.

It’s also unlikely that Israeli leaders will come under any internal pressure to change this position. While the images of the war in Syria have prompted some Palestinians to travel abroad and take up arms against the Syrian regime, sometimes fighting alongside jihadist organizations, the numbers have been small — and their wrath, for now, directed at the Syrian regime, not at Israel. Images of Islamic State’s atrocities, combined with the group’s religious fanaticism, contempt for nation-states, and express disinterest in the Palestinian cause, have left Palestinians — largely secular, nationalist, and deeply committed to building their own nation-state — more alienated than attracted.

Even attempts by Israeli centrists and the U.S. to tie progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process to the fight against Islamic State have left Israel unmoved. Israel, the argument went, should make concessions in its talks with Palestinians to mollify Arab populations as their governments yet again throw in with the Americans — and by extension, with the Israelis. This tactic rests on the idea that the only real threat that Islamic State poses to Israel, however remotely, is if it toppled any of the “moderate” Arab states, especially Jordan, by invading them or capitalizing on their local discontents, or a combination of the two.

But the Israeli government, which has no interest, political or ideological, in facilitating a two-state solution, has so far responded with a shrug. The view in Israel is that the moderate Arab regimes are sufficiently threatened by the spread of Islamic State to prioritize drawing the Americans in, warts and all. If anything triggers revolutions in these countries, it will not be the plight of the Palestinians.

The lack of direct threats notwithstanding, Israel has been able to extract some short-term gains from unfolding catastrophe. With the West again mobilizing against a radical Islamist group, Netanyahu find himself on the familiar turf of the “war on terror.” He is capitalizing on this by trying to equate Palestinian nationalism — especially the religious wing of it — with Islamic State at every conceivable opportunity (even if with little perceptible effect). Second, Israel is again making itself useful to the West as a corner of stability and pro-Western sentiment in an otherwise turbulent Middle East — and is using this to push the Palestinian issue further down the agenda.

These considerations apart, Israel sees Islamic State as something that’s happening to other people — and the country will do its best to keep it so.

Dimi Reider is an Israeli journalist, a contributing editor at +972 Magazine and an Associate Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR).

In the psychopath, a dream emerges like some Utopia of a “happy” world and a social system which does not reject them or force them to submit to laws and customs whose meaning is incomprehensible to them. They dream of a world in which their simple and radical way of experiencing and perceiving reality would dominate; where they would, of course, be assured safety and prosperity. In this Utopian dream, they imagine that those “others”, different, but also more technically skillful than they are, should be put to work to achieve this goal for the psychopaths and others of their kin. “We”, they say, “after all, will create a new government, one of justice”. They are prepared to fight and to suffer for the sake of such a brave new world, and also, of course, to inflict suffering upon others. Such a vision justifies killing people, whose suffering does not move them to compassion because “they” are not quite conspecific. They do not realize that they will consequently meet with opposition which can last for generations.

– Andrew M. Lobaczewski, Political Ponerology (Andrew Lobaczewski addresses the problem of the psychopath and their extremely significant contribution to our macrosocial evils, their ability to act as the éminence grise behind the very structure of our society)

So what is the “mistake”? It is, in short: tribalism. Localism gone nuts. A philosophy of mental pigmies. Us vs. Them. And it couldn’t be simpler than it is… but so few see this clearly. – Dennis Morrisseau